Effect of Gene Therapy on Visual Function in Leber's Congenital Amaurosis
James W.B. Bainbridge, Ph.D., F.R.C.Ophth., Alexander J. Smith, Ph.D., Susie S. Barker, Ph.D., Scott Robbie, M.R.C.Ophth., Robert Henderson, M.R.C.Ophth., Kamaljit Balaggan, M.R.C.Ophth., Ananth Viswanathan, M.D., F.R.C.Ophth., Graham E. Holder, Ph.D., Andrew Stockman, Ph.D., Nick Tyler, Ph.D., Simon Petersen-Jones, Ph.D., Shomi S. Bhattacharya, Ph.D., Adrian J. Thrasher, Ph.D., M.R.C.P., F.R.C.P., Fred W. Fitzke, Ph.D., Barrie J. Carter, Ph.D., Gary S. Rubin, Ph.D., Anthony T. Moore, F.R.C.Ophth., and Robin R. Ali, Ph.D.
Early-onset, severe retinal dystrophy caused by mutations inthe gene encoding retinal pigment epithelium–specific65-kD protein (RPE65) is associated with poor vision at birthand complete loss of vision in early adulthood. We administeredto three young adult patients subretinal injections of recombinantadeno-associated virus vector 2/2 expressing RPE65 complementaryDNA (cDNA) under the control of a human RPE65 promoter. Therewere no serious adverse events. There was no clinically significantchange in visual acuity or in peripheral visual fields on Goldmannperimetry in any of the three patients. We detected no changein retinal responses on electroretinography. One patient hadsignificant improvement in visual function on microperimetryand on dark-adapted perimetry. This patient also showed improvementin a subjective test of visual mobility. These findings providesupport for further clinical studies of this experimental approachin other patients with mutant RPE65. (ClinicalTrials.gov number,NCT00643747
[ClinicalTrials.gov]
.)
Leber's congenital amaurosis is a term used to describe a groupof recessively inherited, severe, infantile-onset rod–conedystrophies.1 Mutation of one of several genes, including RPE65,causes disease that involves impaired vision from birth2,3 andtypically progresses to blindness in the third decade of life.There is no effective treatment. RPE65 is expressed in the retinalpigment epithelium and encodes a 65-kD protein that is a keycomponent of the visual cycle,1,4,5,6,7,8 a biochemical pathwaythat regenerates the visual pigment after exposure to light.9,10,11,12,13,14A lack of functional RPE65 results in deficiency of 11-cis retinalso that rod photoreceptor cells are unable to respond to light.Cone photoreceptor cells may have access to 11-cis–retinaldehydechromophore through an alternative pathway that does not dependon retinal pigment epithelium–derived RPE65,15,16 thusallowing cone-mediated vision in children with Leber's congenitalamaurosis. However, progressive degeneration of cone photoreceptorcells ultimately results in the loss of cone-mediated vision.
Although the retinal dystrophy caused by defects in RPE65 issevere, features of the disorder suggest that it may respondto gene-replacement therapy. There is useful visual functionin childhood, and retinal imaging suggests that photoreceptor-celldeath occurs late in the disease process.3 Gene transfer thereforehas the potential to improve visual function as well as preserveexisting vision. Gene-replacement therapy has been shown toimprove visual function in the Swedish Briard dog, a naturallyoccurring animal model with mutated RPE65.17 Subretinal deliveryof recombinant adeno-associated virus vector containing theRPE65 cDNA results in improved retinal function and improvedvision, as determined by visual mobility in low light.18,19,20,21,22
The purpose of this study was to determine whether gene therapyfor retinal dystrophy caused by RPE65 mutations was associatedwith immediately obvious adverse events and whether efficacycould be demonstrated in humans. In this exploratory, open-label,single-center study involving three young adults, each of whomreceived a single subretinal injection of recombinant adeno-associatedvirus 2/2.hRPE65p.hRPE65, the primary outcome was safety, andthe secondary outcome was evidence of efficacy in terms of visualfunction.
Methods
Patients and Study Design
In this study, we included young adults (17 to 23 years of age)with early-onset, severe retinal dystrophy caused by missensemutations in RPE65 (Table 1 of the Supplementary Appendix, availablewith the full text of this article at www.nejm.org). We excludedpersons with visual acuity in the study eye that was betterthan 20/120 on the Snellen visual acuity scale, null mutations,and contraindications to systemic immunosuppression, as wellas women who were pregnant or lactating. A National Health Servicediagnostic laboratory (Manchester Regional Genetics Laboratory)confirmed the genotypes of potential subjects. In each patient,the eye with the worse acuity was selected as the study eye.The contralateral eye was used as a control.
The study was approved by the U.K. Gene Therapy Advisory Committee,the Medicines and Health Products Regulatory Authority, theMoorfields Research Governance Committee, and the local researchethics committee. All patients gave written informed consent.The study was conducted in compliance with Good Clinical Practiceguidelines according to the European Clinical Trials Directive(Directive 2001 EU/20/EC) and the Declaration of Helsinki.
Before administration of the vector, we evaluated the retinalstructure and function by means of clinical assessment, retinalimaging, psychophysical techniques, and electrodiagnostic methods.Retinal imaging techniques included color fundus photography,fundus autofluorescence imaging, and optical coherence tomographyto determine retinal thickness and integrity. We measured visualacuity, contrast sensitivity, color vision, and cone flickersensitivities. We investigated the patients' visual fields bymeans of microperimetry (see the Supplementary Appendix), Goldmanndynamic perimetry, and photopic and scotopic (dark-adapted)automated static perimetry (see the Supplementary Appendix).All testing was performed according to standardized, detailedprotocols, with controlled room lighting, a dark-adaptationperiod, and a fixed sequence of test patterns. Both microperimetryand dark-adapted perimetry are fully automated, so there waslittle opportunity for experimenter bias. We determined thevisual mobility of the patients at different illumination levelsby measuring their ability to navigate a simulated street scene(Figure 1 in the Supplementary Appendix). Electrophysiologicalevaluation included full-field, pattern, and multifocal electroretinographyperformed to incorporate the standards and guidelines of theInternational Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision.
We repeated assessments of visual function and immune status(see below) at 2, 4, 6, and 12 months (the latter for Patient1 only; Patients 2 and 3 have not yet reached the 12-month point)after administration of the vector. The end point for toxiceffects for each patient was a grade 3 adverse event, definedas loss of visual acuity by 15 or more letters according tothe Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study scale (on which20/20 denotes perfect vision), or severe, unresponsive intraocularinflammation. The end point for efficacy for each patient wasdefined as any improvement in visual function that was greaterthan the test–retest difference for each technique. Theassay of immune response and detection of disseminated recombinantadeno-associated virus are described in the Supplementary Appendix.
Recombinant Adeno-Associated Virus and Subretinal Delivery
The tgAAG76 vector is a recombinant adeno-associated virus vectorof serotype 2. The vector contains the human RPE65 coding sequencedriven by a 1400-bp fragment of the human RPE65 promoter andterminated by the bovine growth hormone polyadenylation site,as described elsewhere.21 The vector was produced by TargetedGenetics Corporation according to Good Manufacturing Practiceguidelines with the use of a B50 packaging cell line,23 an adenovirus–adeno-associatedvirus hybrid shuttle vector containing the tgAAG76 vector genome,and an adenovirus 5 helper virus. The vector was filled in abuffered saline solution at a titer of 1x1011 vector particlesper milliliter and frozen in 1-ml aliquots at –70°C.
Patients 1, 2, and 3 underwent surgery on February 7, April25, and July 11, 2007, respectively. After three-port vitrectomy,we administered up to 1 ml of recombinant adeno-associated virusvector by means of a subretinal cannula (de Juan, Synergetics)to the subretinal space of one eye, involving up to one thirdof the total retinal area, including the macula. To reduce thepossibility of clinically significant intraocular inflammation,patients were given a 5-week course of oral prednisolone, ata daily dose of 0.5 mg per kilogram of body weight for 1 weekbefore administration of the vector, 1 mg per kilogram for thefirst week after administration, 0.5 mg per kilogram for thesecond week, 0.25 mg per kilogram for the third week, and 0.125mg per kilogram for the fourth week. Patients received betamethasoneand cefuroxime subconjunctivally at the completion of surgeryand topical treatment with 0.5% chloramphenicol four times aday for 7 days, 0.1% dexamethasone four times a day for 4 weeks,and 1% atropine twice a day for 7 days after surgery. We performeda clinical examination, fundus photography, and ocular coherencetomography (Stratus OCT, Carl Zeiss Meditec) at frequent intervalsin the early postoperative period to monitor for retinal reattachmentand to identify any intraocular inflammation.
Results
Each patient had little or no vision in low light from an earlyage but retained some limited visual function in good lightingconditions. We selected these patients because they retaineda limited degree of residual retinal function despite advancedretinal degeneration, and they might therefore be expected tobenefit from intervention.
We performed vitrectomy and subretinal injection of the vectorwithout complication in each patient (Figure 1 and Video 1).The vitreous gel was relatively degenerate; a posterior vitreousdetachment was present in Patient 2 and was readily inducedin Patients 1 and 3 by active aspiration at the optic disk withthe use of the vitreous cutter. To deliver the vector to therelatively well-preserved retina at the posterior pole, we performeda retinotomy superior to the proximal part of the superotemporalvascular arcade. To minimize injection of the vector into thevitreous or choroid, we first induced a small detachment ofthe neurosensory retina, using Hartmann's solution, before injectingup to 1 ml of recombinant adeno-associated virus vector (thuscreating a "bleb") through the same single retinotomy. In Patient2, the bleb of the vector extended spontaneously across themacula. We actively manipulated the bleb in Patients 1 and 3— to involve the macula — by injecting air intothe vitreous cavity. We caused no iatrogenic retinal tears,and we left the vector in situ under fluid without retinopexyor intraocular tamponade. On clinical examination 24 hours aftersurgery, the induced retinal detachment had almost fully resolvedin each patient (Figure 1A). Optical coherence tomography showedminimal persistent subretinal fluid at the macula that resolved2 to 3 days after surgery (Figure 1B). On clinical examination,the appearance of the retinas was unchanged for the durationof the follow-up period (up to 12 months).
Figure 1. Images of the Fundus and Maculae before and after Experimental Treatment.
In Panel A, fundus photographs show the appearance of the retina in each patient before administration of the vector (before surgery), immediately after subretinal injection of the vector (during surgery), and at 1 day and 4 months after surgery. The site of injection of the vector is indicated by white arrows (see Video 1). Panel B shows cross-sectional images of the retina obtained by optical coherence tomography with the use of six 6-mm radial-line scans and a standardized mapping protocol to show the structure of the retinal layers in each patient. The presence of residual subretinal vector 1 day after surgery is shown (arrows) in Patients 1 and 3 by an area of low signal (black). Images in Patient 2 were unrecordable 1 day after surgery because of high-amplitude nystagmus.
We detected no dissemination of the vector, as assessed by meansof polymerase-chain-reaction amplification of DNA isolated fromsamples of tears, serum, and saliva collected 1 day and 30 daysafter administration of the vector and from semen collectedat 30 days (data not shown). We observed mild, self-limitingpostoperative intraocular inflammation, which typically followsvitrectomy. There were no other adverse events. We found noevidence of cystoid macular edema clinically or on optical coherencetomography. We detected no specific cellular or humoral immuneresponses to adeno-associated virus capsid (Figure 2 of theSupplementary Appendix) or specific humoral responses to thetransgene product (Figure 2 and Table 2 of the Supplementary Appendix).We detected a small increase in nonspecific activation of Tcells in two patients, which is consistent with a rebound inthe numbers of some lymphocyte subgroups after the withdrawalof corticosteroids (Figure 2A of the Supplementary Appendix).
Visual acuity decreased predictably in association with thetemporary retinal detachment induced by administration of thevector and returned to preoperative levels by 6 months (Table 1).We observed no clinically significant improvement in visualacuity in any of the three patients (Table 1) or any changein peripheral visual fields on Goldmann perimetry testing. Wedetected no change in retinal responses to flash or patternelectroretinography. Before surgery, Patient 2 had high-amplitudenystagmus, which did not change after treatment.
Table 1. Visual Acuities and Contrast Sensitivities at Baseline and in the Postoperative Period.
Microperimetry showed no change in retinal function in Patients1 and 2 but improved retinal function in Patient 3 (Figure 2A).The baseline data for Patient 3 were obtained from the averageof two measurements taken 1 week apart. Measurements were performedon the same retinal loci by registering the fundus image withthe baseline image. In an area extending from the outer maculato a point beyond the major vascular arcade, the retinal sensitivityimproved progressively in the right (study) eye by as much as14 dB (a factor of 25). Thus, the patient could see small spotsof light that were 1/25 as bright as those that could be seenbefore treatment. There was no improvement in the left (control)eye.
Figure 2. Assessment of Visual Function by Microperimetry and Dark-Adapted Perimetry.
The upper portion of each panel shows the microperimetry results for each patient. The size of the circular symbols indicates retinal sensitivity on a scale of 0 to 14 dB. The change in sensitivity in Patient 3 at each tested location from baseline to 6 months' follow-up was evaluated with pointwise linear regression. Of the 55 locations that were tested, 12 (indicated by asterisks) had significant positive slopes (P<0.05), ranging from 12 to 28 dB per year. We would expect no more than three points to pass this test by chance alone. A major change in sensitivity of 9 dB or more (an increase in sensitivity by a factor of 8) is indicated by a plus sign. The lower portion of each panel shows the dark-adapted perimetry results for each patient. The analysis provides significance levels for change over time at each individual test location. We made a series of eight measurements during the 6-month follow-up period. Each measurement is depicted by a bar; the lengths of the bars represent sensitivity, with the long bars showing loss of sensitivity and the short bars showing normal sensitivity. Yellow indicates a decline in sensitivity that is not significant, red indicates a decline that is significant (P<0.05), and green indicates an improvement that is significant (P<0.01). One example, at the X/Y coordinate –9, +3 of the right eye of Patient 3, is magnified to show the sensitivity measurements going from baseline on the left sequentially through the follow-up assessments on the right. In this example, the long gray bars on the left indicate that the patient was unable to see the light stimulus at maximum intensity. The shorter bars on the right indicate progressive improvement in sensitivity (P<0.01).
Dark-adapted perimetry showed no change in retinal functionin Patients 1 and 2 but showed improved retinal function inPatient 3 (Figure 2). In Patients 1 and 2, there was no singlelocation that showed significant improvement or deterioration(P<0.05). In Patient 3, some locations in the left (control)eye had yellow bars representing nonsignificant decreases andred bars representing significant decreases in sensitivity.In the right (study) eye, 37 locations showed significant improvementsin sensitivity (P<0.01). The mean sensitivity at nine locationsin the inferonasal region improved from 4 dB at baseline to26 dB after treatment, and nine locations in the inferotemporalquadrant improved from 7 dB to 28 dB. This finding is equivalentto an improvement in sensitivity of more than 20 dB for these18 locations, or 100 times the sensitivity threshold observedat baseline.
Visual mobility in low light was unchanged in Patients 1 and2 but improved in Patient 3 (Figure 3 and Video 2). In brightconditions, the visually guided mobility in Patient 3 was withinnormal limits at baseline and follow-up. Under low illuminationat baseline, the visual performance of Patient 3 was very poorwith the study eye as compared with the control eye (with whichhe made no errors). At follow-up, we observed a small changefor the control eye. We attribute this change to a general learningeffect; a similar improvement in travel time to complete thecourse under dim illumination was also observed in Patient 1.However, after administration of the vector, the travel timefor Patient 3 improved from 77 seconds to 14 seconds for thestudy eye, and mobility errors decreased from 8 to 0. Similarresults were obtained in a second follow-up test 4 weeks later.
Visually guided mobility was assessed at the Pedestrian Accessibility and Movement Environment Laboratory at University College London (see Fig. 1 and the videos in the Supplementary Appendix). Panels A, B, and C show data for Patients 1, 2, and 3, respectively, at ambient illumination levels of 4 lux and 240 lux. Average travel times for completing the course (±1 SD) for five control subjects are indicated.
Discussion
Recombinant adeno-associated virus 2/2 vector efficiently transducesretinal pigment epithelial cells after subretinal delivery inanimal models.24 We investigated the feasibility of subretinalvector injection in patients with advanced retinal degenerationand found that we could achieve this outcome predictably andwithout immediate adverse events, using a transvitreal, transretinalapproach after pars plana vitrectomy. A relatively degeneratevitreous facilitated detachment and removal of the posteriorvitreous cortex, which otherwise might have resisted passageof the fine cannula. We found that we could deliver througha single retinotomy up to 1 ml of vector subretinally withoutcausing tears in thinned, degenerate retina. To investigatethe effect of RPE65 gene therapy on macular function, we includedthe macula in the area of vector administration by injectionof air into the vitreous cavity when necessary. An importantconcern was that detachment of the neurosensory retina as aresult of subretinal injection could adversely affect visionin the long term, particularly if the detachment involved themacula. We found that the induced retinal detachment resolvedspontaneously and fully within a few days after injection, withsubsequent recovery of vision to preexisting levels. We didnot identify any clinically significant adverse effect of subretinalvector delivery, and the absence of systemic dissemination suggeststhat any extraocular leakage of vector from the subretinal spacewas minimal.
To minimize the possibility of intraocular inflammation elicitedby vector capsid proteins, we used perioperative systemic immunosuppressiveagents. Because of concerns about the possibility of immuneresponses to the transgene product, we used a tissue-specificpromoter and excluded patients with null mutations. We observedno clinically significant intraocular inflammation and detectedno immune responses to either adeno-associated virus capsidor RPE65.
We found consistent evidence, on the basis of both microperimetryand dark-adapted perimetry, of improved vision in one patient(Patient 3). The improvement in his visual mobility in low lightwas also substantially greater than that which would be dueto a modest learning effect and was consistent with the improvementin visual function established by means of perimetry. It isnot clear whether the improvement in visual responses in theperipheral macula is rod-mediated or cone-mediated. Neithercan we be sure that the improvement in visual function is entirelydue to enhanced levels of RPE65 in the retina. Evidence forthis could be obtained only by biopsy of retinal material, whichwould be unsafe and unethical. Central macula function and visualacuity did not improve, despite exposure of this region to thevector; this may be due either to amblyopia (i.e., the studyeye was amblyopic) or to a requirement for higher levels ofRPE65 at the fovea. Visual function improved in only one patient(Patient 3); he had better baseline visual acuity in both thestudy (amblyopic) eye and the control eye than either of theother patients. He was not the youngest patient, but he probablyhad less advanced retinal disease at baseline, which may explainwhy the improvement in this patient was not observed in theother patients. Whether further retinal degeneration is delayedin any of the patients will become apparent only after severalyears.
The results of this study suggest that subretinal administrationof recombinant adeno-associated virus vector is not associatedwith immediate adverse events in patients with severe retinaldystrophy and that adeno-associated virus–mediated RPE65gene therapy can lead to modest improvements in visual function,even in patients with advanced degeneration. Our findings providesupport for the development of further clinical studies in childrenwith RPE65 deficiency; these children are more likely to benefitthan adults.
Supported by grants from the U.K. Department of Health, theBritish Retinitis Pigmentosa Society, and the Special Trusteesof Moorfields Eye Hospital, and by the Sir Jules Thorn CharitableTrust, the Wellcome Trust, the European Union (EVI-Genoret andClinigene programs), the Medical Research Council, FoundationFighting Blindness, Fight for Sight, the Ulverscroft Foundation,Fighting Blindness (Ireland), Moorfields Eye Hospital, and Instituteof Ophthalmology Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology,University College London.
Drs. Bainbridge and Ali report being the inventors associatedwith a U.S. patent application assigned to University CollegeLondon and Targeted Genomics Corporation entitled, "Devicesand methods for delivering polynucleotides into retinal cellsof the macula and fovea"; Drs. Fitzke and Viswanathan reportbeing two of the inventors of Progressor software, the intellectualproperty rights for which are owned by University College Londonand Moorfields Eye Hospital and licensed to Medisoft; Dr. Carterreports being an employee of Targeted Genetics and receivingconsulting fees from Sangamo Biosciences. No other potentialconflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
We thank Andrew Dick and the U.K. RPE65 Gene Therapy Data andSafety Monitoring Committee; Alan Bird and the Moorfields EyeHospital RPE65 Gene Therapy Advisory Committee; Vivien Perryand Moorfields Pharmaceuticals; Graeme Black, for help withgenotyping; David Wong, for advice on surgical techniques; andthe patients and their families for their effort and commitment.
Source Information
From the Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London (J.W.B.B., A.J.S., S.S. Barker, S.R., R.H., K.B., A.V., G.E.H., A.S., S.S. Bhattacharya, F.W.F., G.S.R., A.T.M., R.R.A.); Moorfields Eye Hospital (J.W.B.B., A.V., G.E.H., A.T.M.); the National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, University College London and Moorfields Eye Hospital (J.W.B.B., G.S.R., A.T.M., R.R.A.); the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University College London (N.T.); and the Institute of Child Health, University College London (A.J.T., R.R.A.) — all in London; Michigan State University, East Lansing (S.P.-J.); and Targeted Genetics Corporation, Seattle (B.J.C.). Drs. Bainbridge and Smith contributed equally to this article. This article (10.1056/NEJMoa0802268) was published at www.nejm.org on April 27, 2008.
Address reprint requests to Dr. Ali at the Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, Bath St., London EC1V 9EL, United Kingdom, or at r.ali{at}ucl.ac.uk.
References
Hanein S, Perrault I, Gerber S, et al. Leber congenital amaurosis: comprehensive survey of the genetic heterogeneity, refinement of the clinical definition, and genotype-phenotype correlations as a strategy for molecular diagnosis. Hum Mutat 2004;23:306-317. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Lorenz B, Gyürüs P, Preising M, et al. Early-onset severe rod-cone dystrophy in young children with RPE65 mutations. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:2735-2742. [Free Full Text]
Paunescu K, Wabbels B, Preising MN, Lorenz B. Longitudinal and cross-sectional study of patients with early-onset severe retinal dystrophy associated with RPE65 mutations. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2005;243:417-426. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Thompson DA, Gyürüs P, Fleischer LL, et al. Genetics and phenotypes of RPE65 mutations in inherited retinal degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:4293-4299. [Free Full Text]
Gu SM, Thompson DA, Srikumari CR, et al. Mutations in RPE65 cause autosomal recessive childhood-onset severe retinal dystrophy. Nat Genet 1997;17:194-197. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Marlhens F, Bareil C, Griffoin JM, et al. Mutations in RPE65 cause Leber's congenital amaurosis. Nat Genet 1997;17:139-141. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Morimura H, Fishman GA, Grover SA, Fulton AB, Berson EL, Dryja TP. Mutations in the RPE65 gene in patients with autosomal recessive retinitis pigmentosa or Leber congenital amaurosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998;95:3088-3093. [Free Full Text]
Lotery AJ, Namperumalsamy P, Jacobson SG, et al. Mutation analysis of 3 genes in patients with Leber congenital amaurosis. Arch Ophthalmol 2000;118:538-543. [Free Full Text]
Thompson DA, Gal A. Genetic defects in vitamin A metabolism of the retinal pigment epithelium. Dev Ophthalmol 2003;37:141-154. [CrossRef][Medline]
Redmond TM, Yu S, Lee E, et al. Rpe65 is necessary for production of 11-cis-vitamin A in the retinal visual cycle. Nat Genet 1998;20:344-351. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Mata NL, Moghrabi WN, Lee JS, et al. Rpe65 is a retinyl ester binding protein that presents insoluble substrate to the isomerase in retinal pigment epithelial cells. J Biol Chem 2004;279:635-643. [Free Full Text]
Jin M, Li S, Moghrabi WN, Sun H, Travis GH. Rpe65 is the retinoid isomerase in bovine retinal pigment epithelium. Cell 2005;122:449-459. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Moiseyev G, Chen Y, Takahashi Y, Wu BX, Ma JX. RPE65 is the isomerohydrolase in the retinoid visual cycle. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:12413-12418. [Free Full Text]
Redmond TM, Poliakov E, Yu S, Tsai JY, Lu Z, Gentleman S. Mutation of key residues of RPE65 abolishes its enzymatic role as isomerohydrolase in the visual cycle. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:13658-13663. [Free Full Text]
Znoiko SL, Crouch RK, Moiseyev G, Ma JX. Identification of the RPE65 protein in mammalian cone photoreceptors. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:1604-1609. [Free Full Text]
Wu BX, Moiseyev G, Chen Y, Rohrer B, Crouch RK, Ma JX. Identification of RDH10, an all-trans retinol dehydrogenase, in retinal Muller cells. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:3857-3862. [Free Full Text]
Veske A, Nilsson SE, Narfström K, Gal A. Retinal dystrophy of Swedish Briard/Briard-beagle dogs is due to a 4-bp deletion in RPE65. Genomics 1999;57:57-61. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Acland GM, Aguirre GD, Ray J, et al. Gene therapy restores vision in a canine model of childhood blindness. Nat Genet 2001;28:92-95. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Narfström K, Katz ML, Bragadottir R, et al. Functional and structural recovery of the retina after gene therapy in the RPE65 null mutation dog. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:1663-1672. [Free Full Text]
Narfström K, Katz ML, Ford M, Redmond TM, Rakoczy E, Bragadottir R. In vivo gene therapy in young and adult RPE65–/– dogs produces long-term visual improvement. J Hered 2003;94:31-37. [Free Full Text]
Le Meur G, Stieger K, Smith AJ, et al. Restoration of vision in RPE65-deficient Briard dogs using an AAV serotype 4 vector that specifically targets the retinal pigmented epithelium. Gene Ther 2007;14:292-303. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Aguirre GK, Komáromy AM, Cideciyan AV, et al. Canine and human visual cortex intact and responsive despite early retinal blindness from RPE65 mutation. PLoS Med 2007;4:e230-e230. [CrossRef][Medline]
Gao GP, Qu G, Faust LZ, et al. High-titer adeno-associated viral vectors from a Rep/Cap cell line and hybrid shuttle virus. Hum Gene Ther 1998;9:2353-2362. [Web of Science][Medline]
Auricchio A, Rolling F. Adeno-associated viral vectors for retinal gene transfer and treatment of retinal diseases. Curr Gene Ther 2005;5:339-348. [CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Appendix
The following investigators, who are members of the MoorfieldsEye Hospital and University College London Eye Gene TherapyStudy Group, participated in this trial: G.W. Aylward, D. Boampong,C. Broderick, P. Buch, C. Childs, Y. Duran, D. Ehlich, S. Falk,M. Feely, T. Fujiyama, F. Ikeji, V. Luong, A. Milliken, R. Maclaren,P. Moradi, F. Mowat, M. Richardson, C. Ripamonti, A.G. Robson,H. Rostron, I. Russell-Eggitt, P. Schlottmann, M. Tschernutter,and N. Wasseem.
Redmond, T. M., Poliakov, E., Kuo, S., Chander, P., Gentleman, S.
(2010). RPE65, Visual Cycle Retinol Isomerase, Is Not Inherently 11-cis-specific: SUPPORT FOR A CARBOCATION MECHANISM OF RETINOL ISOMERIZATION. J. Biol. Chem.
285: 1919-1927
[Abstract][Full Text]
McKibbin, M., Ali, M., Mohamed, M. D., Booth, A. P., Bishop, F., Pal, B., Springell, K., Raashid, Y., Jafri, H., Inglehearn, C. F.
(2010). Genotype-Phenotype Correlation for Leber Congenital Amaurosis in Northern Pakistan. Arch Ophthalmol
128: 107-113
[Abstract][Full Text]
Burton, H., Alberg, C., Moore, A. T.
(2009). Genetics in ophthalmology: equity in service provision?. J Public Health (Oxf)
0: fdp110v1-fdp110
[Abstract][Full Text]
Huber, G., Beck, S. C., Grimm, C., Sahaboglu-Tekgoz, A., Paquet-Durand, F., Wenzel, A., Humphries, P., Redmond, T. M., Seeliger, M. W., Fischer, M. D.
(2009). Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography in Mouse Models of Retinal Degeneration. IOVS
50: 5888-5895
[Abstract][Full Text]
Campbell, M., Nguyen, A. T. H., Kiang, A.-S., Tam, L. C. S., Gobbo, O. L., Kerskens, C., Dhubhghaill, S. N., Humphries, M. M., Farrar, G.-J., Kenna, P. F., Humphries, P.
(2009). An experimental platform for systemic drug delivery to the retina. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
106: 17817-17822
[Abstract][Full Text]
Mingozzi, F., Meulenberg, J. J., Hui, D. J., Basner-Tschakarjan, E., Hasbrouck, N. C., Edmonson, S. A., Hutnick, N. A., Betts, M. R., Kastelein, J. J., Stroes, E. S., High, K. A.
(2009). AAV-1-mediated gene transfer to skeletal muscle in humans results in dose-dependent activation of capsid-specific T cells. Blood
114: 2077-2086
[Abstract][Full Text]
Gibbs, D., Cideciyan, A. V., Jacobson, S. G., Williams, D. S.
(2009). Retinal Pigment Epithelium Defects in Humans and Mice with Mutations in MYO7A: Imaging Melanosome-Specific Autofluorescence. IOVS
50: 4386-4393
[Abstract][Full Text]
Lai, C.-M., Estcourt, M. J., Wikstrom, M., Himbeck, R. P., Barnett, N. L., Brankov, M., Tee, L. B. G., Dunlop, S. A., Degli-Esposti, M. A., Rakoczy, E. P.
(2009). rAAV.sFlt-1 Gene Therapy Achieves Lasting Reversal of Retinal Neovascularization in the Absence of a Strong Immune Response to the Viral Vector. IOVS
50: 4279-4287
[Abstract][Full Text]
Maeda, T., Maeda, A., Casadesus, G., Palczewski, K., Margaron, P.
(2009). Evaluation of 9-cis-Retinyl Acetate Therapy in Rpe65-/- Mice. IOVS
50: 4368-4378
[Abstract][Full Text]
VandenDriessche, T., Ivics, Z., Izsvak, Z., Chuah, M. K. L.
(2009). Emerging potential of transposons for gene therapy and generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Blood
114: 1461-1468
[Abstract][Full Text]
Cideciyan, A. V., Hauswirth, W. W., Aleman, T. S., Kaushal, S., Schwartz, S. B., Boye, S. L., Windsor, E. A.M., Conlon, T. J., Sumaroka, A., Roman, A. J., Byrne, B. J., Jacobson, S. G.
(2009). Case 15-2009: a man with coma after cardiac arrest.. NEJM
361: 725-725
[Full Text]
Luna, G., Kjellstrom, S., Verardo, M. R., Lewis, G. P., Byun, J., Sieving, P. A., Fisher, S. K.
(2009). The Effects of Transient Retinal Detachment on Cavity Size and Glial and Neural Remodeling in a Mouse Model of X-Linked Retinoschisis. IOVS
50: 3977-3984
[Abstract][Full Text]
Kaspar, R. W., Wills, C. E., Kaspar, B. K.
(2009). Gene Therapy and Informed Consent Decision Making: Nursing Research Directions. Biol Res Nurs
11: 98-107
[Abstract]
Chen, F. K., Patel, P. J., Xing, W., Bunce, C., Egan, C., Tufail, A. T., Coffey, P. J., Rubin, G. S., Da Cruz, L.
(2009). Test-Retest Variability of Microperimetry Using the Nidek MP1 in Patients with Macular Disease. IOVS
50: 3464-3472
[Abstract][Full Text]
Charbel Issa, P, Bolz, H J, Ebermann, I, Domeier, E, Holz, F G, Scholl, H P N
(2009). Characterisation of severe rod-cone dystrophy in a consanguineous family with a splice site mutation in the MERTK gene. Br J Ophthalmol
93: 920-925
[Abstract][Full Text]
Tan, M. H., Smith, A. J., Pawlyk, B., Xu, X., Liu, X., Bainbridge, J. B., Basche, M., McIntosh, J., Tran, H. V., Nathwani, A., Li, T., Ali, R. R.
(2009). Gene therapy for retinitis pigmentosa and Leber congenital amaurosis caused by defects in AIPL1: effective rescue of mouse models of partial and complete Aipl1 deficiency using AAV2/2 and AAV2/8 vectors. Hum Mol Genet
18: 2099-2114
[Abstract][Full Text]
Maeda, T., Cideciyan, A. V., Maeda, A., Golczak, M., Aleman, T. S., Jacobson, S. G., Palczewski, K.
(2009). Loss of cone photoreceptors caused by chromophore depletion is partially prevented by the artificial chromophore pro-drug, 9-cis-retinyl acetate. Hum Mol Genet
18: 2277-2287
[Abstract][Full Text]
Wilson, J. M.
(2009). A History Lesson for Stem Cells. Science
324: 727-728
[Abstract][Full Text]
Jacobson, S. G., Aleman, T. S., Cideciyan, A. V., Roman, A. J., Sumaroka, A., Windsor, E. A. M., Schwartz, S. B., Heon, E., Stone, E. M.
(2009). Defining the Residual Vision in Leber Congenital Amaurosis Caused by RPE65 Mutations. IOVS
50: 2368-2375
[Abstract][Full Text]
Samardzija, M., Tanimoto, N., Kostic, C., Beck, S., Oberhauser, V., Joly, S., Thiersch, M., Fahl, E., Arsenijevic, Y., von Lintig, J., Wenzel, A., Seeliger, M. W., Grimm, C.
(2009). In conditions of limited chromophore supply rods entrap 11-cis-retinal leading to loss of cone function and cell death. Hum Mol Genet
18: 1266-1275
[Abstract][Full Text]
Cideciyan, A. V., Swider, M., Aleman, T. S., Tsybovsky, Y., Schwartz, S. B., Windsor, E. A.M., Roman, A. J., Sumaroka, A., Steinberg, J. D., Jacobson, S. G., Stone, E. M., Palczewski, K.
(2009). ABCA4 disease progression and a proposed strategy for gene therapy. Hum Mol Genet
18: 931-941
[Abstract][Full Text]
Carlisle, R. C., Di, Y., Cerny, A. M., Sonnen, A. F.-P., Sim, R. B., Green, N. K., Subr, V., Ulbrich, K., Gilbert, R. J. C., Fisher, K. D., Finberg, R. W., Seymour, L. W.
(2009). Human erythrocytes bind and inactivate type 5 adenovirus by presenting Coxsackie virus-adenovirus receptor and complement receptor 1. Blood
113: 1909-1918
[Abstract][Full Text]
Lorenz, B., Poliakov, E., Schambeck, M., Friedburg, C., Preising, M. N., Redmond, T. M.
(2008). A Comprehensive Clinical and Biochemical Functional Study of a Novel RPE65 Hypomorphic Mutation. IOVS
49: 5235-5242
[Abstract][Full Text]
Jacobson, S. G., Cideciyan, A. V., Aleman, T. S., Sumaroka, A., Windsor, E. A. M., Schwartz, S. B., Heon, E., Stone, E. M.
(2008). Photoreceptor Layer Topography in Children with Leber Congenital Amaurosis Caused by RPE65 Mutations. IOVS
49: 4573-4577
[Abstract][Full Text]
Cideciyan, A. V., Aleman, T. S., Boye, S. L., Schwartz, S. B., Kaushal, S., Roman, A. J., Pang, J.-j., Sumaroka, A., Windsor, E. A. M., Wilson, J. M., Flotte, T. R., Fishman, G. A., Heon, E., Stone, E. M., Byrne, B. J., Jacobson, S. G., Hauswirth, W. W.
(2008). Human gene therapy for RPE65 isomerase deficiency activates the retinoid cycle of vision but with slow rod kinetics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
105: 15112-15117
[Abstract][Full Text]
Rattner, A., Toulabi, L., Williams, J., Yu, H., Nathans, J.
(2008). The Genomic Response of the Retinal Pigment Epithelium to Light Damage and Retinal Detachment. J. Neurosci.
28: 9880-9889
[Abstract][Full Text]